ABC faces boycott after cancelling Tim Allen’s fan favorite hit TV show (too conservative?)

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Sheye

Can't have Republicans looking like they are the sane ones with the common sense.

Given the activity in this thread alone, I can only assume that Last Man Standing was more fantasy than comedy.

And perhaps the message they wanted to convey failed.

Their pollsters keep a close eye on the TV shows' "message" impacts on public political opinion.

a reply to: xuenchen

Do you think the idea was to show the public how stupid conservatives are? There is some of that on the show, and there is poking fun at racism-sexism-vegetarianism-sex-gays-foreigners.....

It is a well balanced show-this is from a person who is neither conservative of liberal.

A shame.

"All in the Family" would never make it today.

As time progresses, intolerance is now inserted itself in comedy.

Damn shame.

Mg

originally posted by: Tardacus
ABC shouldn`t have any trouble finding a new # 2 rated show,people will watch any crap that is put on T.V. now.

I will not watch "anything" and I consider myself people.

a reply to: missed_gear

Do you think the intolerance is on both sides, meaning comservs and libs?

I find libs are less likely to laugh at themselves-I am a middle of the roader-some lib and conserv leanings.

a reply to: seasonal

ABC has a right to run what they want, people have a right to watch or not watch.

Choice.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Correct, this is why there is talks of a boycott. The unwritten rule is if a show is bringing the rating, it is all good. Well the show is bringing the ratings and they cancelled it. So-boycott.

a reply to: seasonal

I get it, it's not politically correct enough for your tastes but a company can cancel one of their properties if they want, it's really not much different than a bakery choosing not to make a cake for a gay wedding.

I'm not advocating either situation just giving a little context to the discussion. Both sides are guilty of the same sort of things and all anger being directed toward one side is misguided and ignorant. Both sides are the problem.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

There is a difference in your example.

The bakery would have to stop making a "cake" that it has invested huge $$$ in and is it's #2 seller.

Luckily the bakery in this case has DEEP pockets. So it can afford to cancel a highly rated cake.

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: DBCowboy

Correct, this is why there is talks of a boycott. The unwritten rule is if a show is bringing the rating, it is all good. Well the show is bringing the ratings and they cancelled it. So-boycott.

You got to remember though, these big media companies can rig the ratings to show that they increased their overall rating after Tim's show was cancelled. They are good at twisting evidence, that is not new.

As an example, a truck commercial talks about the hundred eighty companies that rated their truck number one in their comparison. So how did these companies collect the evidence, did they compare the truck against all of the worst trucks, did they only call Chevy truck people? How much did GM pay them for putting the best truck of the year article in their magazine. It is all sales scams in this country, let the buyer beware.

a reply to: seasonal

Personally, I think that the networks would suffer more from bad press, threads like yours, rather than boycotts.

So 6 seasons and 2nd ranking tv show on ABC got cancelled because politics?
That's a stretch even for you seasonal.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Do you think bad press leads to withering viewers?

I guess viewers don't matter when it comes to conservative shows. Cancel them even though they are successful-the American way?

a reply to: seasonal

Viewership is almost secondary.

I mean, who in the hell watches "the Kardashians"?

a reply to: Deaf Alien

Why then would it get cancelled if the only thing that matters is ratings. Ratings means the network can charge the big dollar.

a reply to: seasonal

Do you think a successful bakery is going to go under from not selling one cake? Doubtful. ABC is owned by Disney which is probably the richest company on Earth and could care less about one show just like those bakeries didn't care about one less cake.

The fact still remains that there is nothing illegal about them canceling one if their own properties, who is anyone to tell them how they should run their business?

The two most intolerant parts of society are liberals and Islamic extremists.

More alike than unalike.

Imagine Married With Children being replicated today. Liberals would have seizures.

a reply to: DBCowboy


If viewership is secondary what would be singularly first? Viewer directly make advertising $$$ go up or down.

The decision makes no sense.

originally posted by: missed_gear
A shame.

"All in the Family" would never make it today.

As time progresses, intolerance is now inserted itself in comedy.

Damn shame.

Mg

No kidding.

Not even Mel Brooks could get away with Blazing Saddles NOW...

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Hey it was your metaphor of a bakery.

If the bakery stops making it's second best selling cake it would go out of business. Next time pick a better metaphor.